but can accurately detect where they are.

From what range, 2 inches? Maybe if you lined up A-J across the road edge-to-edge it would have a hard time getting around them, but I'd like to believe that the sensors would be able to observe an obstruction from far enough ahead that it would be able to stop safely in this event. So instead you have A-J moving about. The laws of physics mean that nothing can simply teleport in front of us, nor can anything attain infinite acceleration, so we can detect the vehicle, child and/or dog that is moving towards our current path well before it cuts us off.

D) would probably be the worst hazard of the lot, since being light-weight it would be able to accelerate and change direction much faster than most of the other obstacles. Worst case, having come to a complete stop to wait for it to cross the road, the vehicle is blocking the breeze that was pushing it in the first place, leaving us at a standstill.

For example, hitting an elderly person in order to avoid hitting a small child.

Or maybe it will just note the existence of an object moving at x m/s to the right towards the current lane while the obstacle is y meters away while establishing a list of the smoothest paths out of the infinitely many paths that would prevent the vehicle from striking any of the obstacles.

Definitely easier than trying to determine whether the first obstacle is a baby carriage and the second obstacle is granny. Believe it or not, that light pole did NOT just "jump out in front of you" no matter how drunk you insist you aren't. Neither did granny and/or the baby.

I take that you don't have Java or Flash installed on any of your Windows computers? Because from what I've seen, you can be a smart and savvy user, but if those plugins are installed, especially Java, you will get owned at some point.

You are speculating on a system that would be able to correctly identify ALL THE OBJECTS IN THE AREA and that is never going to happen.

It doesn't have to identify all the objects in the area, it simply has to not hit them.

I've played around with surround myself, and eventually came to the conclusion that for any reasonable budget, you're better off with a stereo system. As in, if you're going to spend $400 on speakers, you're much better off with two $200 speakers than with eight $50 speakers needed to do 7.1. Having two speakers also makes the setup a lot easier too, and unless you're going to set up a surround set up correctly you might as well not bother. Most home surround set ups that I have are set up incorrectly, which is pretty understandable given that most people can't dedicate a room to a home theater.

So ignorant.
He probably doesn't even understand Power Factor -- let alone any real complexities in electrical generation and distribution.
He seems like a guy who added up all generation and all consumption, said that those numbers are essentially equal, meaning that this is just a question of distributing the power to where it's needed. It it were only so simple.

Actually, I would say that the MHz lost it's usefulness in the x86 world long before the P4 came out. More like the (original) Pentium-era, when Cyrix and AMD starting selling chips with the "PR" rating. Of course, the PR thing was even more meaningless, as a 150MHz Cyrix chip may perform like a Pentium 200 when it came to integer performance (hench "PR200+"), but was more like a Pentium 90 when it came to FPU performance.

Do you honestly think that a business is going to sink billions of dollars in capital outlays to make a gigantic automated factory which produces crap that no one can buy?

How many billions of dollars were sunk into building houses nobody could afford the mortgages on?

What people don't seem to realize is that the robots that replace workers will be cheap

Why?

To replace workers, they don't have to be cheap, they simply have to be cheapER than the worker they replaced. Just because I make $x/yr doesn't mean I can afford a robot that costs ($x-$50).

But do you real want bob to be working 0 hours and have jack working 60-80 all the time?

If he's Bob, of course!
If he's Jack, of course not!

If he's hiring Jack, of course he wants to hire Jack to work 80 hours a week in an overtime exempt position so they don't have to pay two people to do the work one person can do.

Except it's not an investment. It's a place to live. Having to pay capital gains on your home is insane, especially if you've lived there for 22 years.

We're not throwing you in jail without a trial, we're merely restricting your "privilege" to travel more than 6 feet in any direction.

Well, the other way of doing it other than increasing the size of the Dyson sphere would be to build it around a smaller star that emits less radiation. It may not be a bad idea if you're in it for the long haul, as the smallest stars will burn for a thousand times longer than a star like ours, meaning you get the best return on your investment of building the Dyson sphere in the first place. Of course, you then have the problem that less radiation is hitting the surface of the inside of the sphere. That can be solved by, of course, building it smaller which means it will take less material (another plus), but then you're back to emitting infrared again.

So you don't know if they're read it, yet you categorically state that someone is wrong in assuming they haven't read it since it's not stated that they have?

I didn't read your post, I just randomly clicked around on the screen and mashed on my keyboard with my fists and yet not only did I manage to quote your post, I formed a perfectly valid reductio ad absurdam by demonstrating how absurd it is to state that I haven't read your post while quoting it and replying to it's content.

It's not. That's why you have to be...uhh....prepared